Talk:Deconstructor
"Volcano" vs. "Deconstructor" Can this be renamed to Volcano? this is the official name for the structure Abedshark10 (talk) 05:48, July 27, 2019 (UTC) : Well, technically both of them are viable names, but deconstructor is there to avoid confusion from the actual Volcano on the Continent. The monster handlers called it the Deconstructor. In the game files, Clamble's purple attire is called a skirt when really it isn't a skirt. Hydroquake Vortex (talk) 12:56, July 27, 2019 (UTC) :: That's true, but this isn't just a nickname given to the structure. in all text files, its soley reffered to as "Volcano" and only has the codename deconstructor. they didn't call it the Deconstructor, they were talking to diane who asked if there could be a structure that turns items into the base items that they are made of, and they used the word deconstructor to describe what it is. There also really isn't any use for the volcano on the continent, so i'm not sure who it would confuse. Deconstructor should still be used as a re-direct, but all files heavily imply it would just be called "Volcano" if ever offically added in game. Abedshark10 (talk) 17:12, July 27, 2019 (UTC) ::: Is it given a name when it appears in the Colouring Book app? Since we know that nicknames and code names are common in the files, and it's not clear whether "deconstructor" was being used as a name or as a descriptor in the chat, it's hard to say that either is its official name... especially since it was never part of the game. I agree with Hydroquake Vortex that "volcano" is ambiguous, and that's a count against using that term. BunsenH (talk) 18:14, July 27, 2019 (UTC) :::: I'll have to look into it more, I've barely touched the Colouring Book myself. One thing I can guarantee though is that if you go into the Dawn of Fire files, the sound, image, and animation files for the structure are all under the codename "deconstructor", similarly to how in the original my singing monsters all files like that would go under codenames based on their elements, like "ABCD" for Shellbeat or "U14" for Scargo. However, in a similar manner there are large text files that can be accessed that include all text meant to be in game. this includes names of items, official descriptions, and any flavor text you'll find along the way. This is common in both the original and in Dawn of Fire, and they all are available in multiple languages. At no point in the dawn of fire text files is the word "Deconstructor" used, however it contains the description I added to the page, flavor text such as "Source:Volcano" (similarly to how if you click on an applesauce it'd say "Source:Masher") and in a long string of text just listing off all structures, it simply says volcano. There really is no way to truly understand what all of that means, but all signs point to "Volcano" being the intended in game name BBB planned to give it. Abedshark10 (talk) 19:34, July 27, 2019 (UTC) ::::: I think what something is called in the filenames is of little or no importance to their naming in the wiki. Either it has been mentioned in official channels (published social media posts, videos or in-game), and then we use that name. Or if it hasn't been mentioned in official channels but only in the files it is considered a leak and we shouldn't have it in an article anyway. MistofMists (talk) 01:00, July 28, 2019 (UTC) :::::: I always assumed this to be the case, but i've been noticing files suddenly become much more relevant in this wiki. all monsters and elements seem to now be organized in order of "ABCDE" rather then order you unlock a monster in game, and a lot of info for things such as Floot Fly and Mimic are entirely out of the files. I don't think any leaks should be on the wiki, but I wouldn't consider any info pertaining to the Volcano/Deconstructor leaks since all of its info has been in the files for dawn of fire since the original version in 2015 and almost all other information from those early versions have either been added into game before a year had passed or has since been proven to be unfinished and seemingly scrapped content. BBB could add the volcano, just like they could add Mimic or Floot Fly, but at this point I think it's been too long for it to be considered a leak. Abedshark10 (talk) 04:10, July 28, 2019 (UTC) :::::: For what it's worth, I've been uncomfortable with the way stuff from the files has been creeping into the wiki. For a long time, we had a firm policy against anything of the kind, citing BBB's copyrights. But then they seemed to be a bit more relaxed about that, so long as people were giving them credit and not abusing the items... or at least that was a plausible interpretation of their published policies. We've pushed back hard on things like complete sound and image files that hadn't had anything significantly transformative done. A few odds and ends such as the Floot Fly image seemed to be harmless, but now we've got people searching those files exhaustively to try to find things, apparently to try to score metaphorical points and show off their "hacking" skills. BunsenH (talk) 05:06, July 28, 2019 (UTC) :::::: :::::: That makes a lot of sense. I defintly agree that the less stuff from files the better and the day people start adding stuff like that is the day a line has been crossed. That also defintly explains everything in general with files suddenly being more relevant in this wiki then normally. Perhaps we should try to update the wiki policy in order to make clearer guidlines as to what we should consider small and harmless verses crossing a line and in general too much reliance on files, since there seems to just be a lot of gray area there which is where stuff like this lies. Either way, I can see why it really is probably best to just leave the page as it is for now unless BBB decide to give us more information on this supposedly scrapped structure. but perhaps an overall discussion should be open on classifying what does count as helpful and harmless file usage to just unnecessary and useless Abedshark10 (talk) 15:19, July 28, 2019 (UTC)